Amendments Nos. 1 and 10 to 22, inclusive, can be taken together. Is that agreed? Agreed.
SECTION 1.
I move amendment No. 1:
In page 5, subsection (3), line 20, after "35," to insert "36 to 48,".
Amendments Nos. 10 to 22, inclusive, insert new sections forming a new Part VI to the Bill. They amend the Investment Intermediaries Act, 1995 to make the Central Bank of Ireland the supervisory authority for all investment business firms and that is their sole purpose.
The Investment Intermediaries Act, 1995 established the Minister for Enterprise and Employment and the Central Bank of Ireland as the supervisory authorities for investment business firms. The Act also provides that the Minister and the Bank are the competent authorities for the purposes of the EU Investment Services and Capital Adequacy Directives in relation to those investment business firms which are subject to the directives. In broad terms, the Minister for Enterprise and Employment is responsible for investment business firms which do business only in relation to products like unit trusts or bank deposits and which do not have discretionary control over client funds or investment instruments. The Central Bank is responsible for regulating all other investment intermediaries.
I acknowledge the work being done by the Dáil Select Committee on Enterprise and Economic Strategy, which has examined the system of regulation of investment intermediaries regulated under the Department of Enterprise and Employment, with particular reference to the collapse of the Taylor group of companies. I emphasise that the amendments to the Investment Intermediaries Act which I propose today are not intended to cut across the work of the Select Committee. These amendments transfer responsibility for the regulation of all investment intermediaries to the Central Bank and I will return to that in a moment to explain the reasons for proceeding with that transfer immediately. Apart from that, I do not propose any changes at this stage to the regulatory provisions for investment intermediaries which were put in place by the Intermediaries Act and I look forward to the views of the Select Committee on Enterprise and Economic Strategy.
It might be helpful if I set out the wider context of the Government decision to transfer responsibility for regulating investment intermediaries from the Minister for Enterprise and Employment to the Central Bank. The Investment Intermediaries Act was drafted to knit in with the existing structures for supervising insurance intermediaries and was broadly in line with the structure proposed by the investment services industry, including the insurance industry, in early 1994. The intention was that intermediaries regulated under the Minister for Enterprise and Employment would have a self-regulatory regime modelled on the provisions in Part IV of the Insurance Act, 1989 which apply to investment intermediaries. Therefore, for the Investment Intermediaries Act to work in this respect, the Irish Brokers' Association and the Insurance Industry Compliance Bureau would be required to extend their remit to cover investment business as well as insurance business. The structure proposed by the investment services industry was based on this arrangement.
In the event, the bureau declined to take on a regulatory role for investment business and the Irish Brokers' Association, which was appointed an approved representative body under the Investment Intermediaries Act, has announced that it will shortly give up that role. The result was that the Department of Enterprise and Employment found itself responsible for directly regulating several hundred investment intermediaries. This was so far removed from the original intention for regulating investment intermediaries that it called for a fundamental re-appraisal of the role of the Department of Enterprise and Employment.
My colleague, the Minister of State responsible for commerce, science and technology, Deputy Rabbitte, announced on 3 January last that the Government had accepted his recommendation that responsibility for the regulation of all investment intermediaries should be allocated to the Central Bank. He indicated he had made this recommendation in the light of the Taylor affair and earlier financial scandals, which had shaken public confidence in its ability to invest safely through the system of investment intermediaries operating throughout the country.
In deciding to transfer responsibility to the Central Bank, the Minister indicated the Government had had regard to a number of factors, including: the need to take strong and decisive action to restore confidence in the investment intermediary system; the experience to date in the implementation of the existing regulatory structure under the Investment Intermediaries Act, 1995; the fact that the regulatory regime envisaged when the original legislation was drafted was no longer feasible because of the decision by the Irish Brokers' Association to cease to act as a self-regulatory body in respect of its members and the earlier decision by the Insurance Intermediary Compliance Bureau, or IICB, not to undertake a regulatory role under the Act; recommendations made to the Minister, Deputy Rabbitte, by the authorised officer carrying out an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the Taylor affair; the need to maximise operating efficiency and ensure consistency in the approach to legislation; and, most importantly, the expertise and resources available to the Central Bank for the regulation of financial concerns generally and investment business firms specifically. To give effect to the Government decision as soon as possible, the amendments to the Investment Intermediaries Act needed to transfer responsibility for the regulation of investment intermediaries from the Minister for Enterprise and Employment to the Central Bank are now being put forward as Committee Stage amendments to the Central Bank Bill. As indicated by the Minister, Deputy Rabbitte, in deciding to transfer responsibility to the Central Bank, the Government took account of the need to take strong and decisive action to restore confidence in the investment intermediary system. It is therefore essential that responsibility be transferred to the Central Bank as early as possible. Otherwise, the Department of Enterprise and Employment would have to establish an interim regulatory system to fill the gap left by the withdrawal of the Irish Brokers' Association and the Insurance Intermediaries Compliance Bureau. This would be a waste of resources given that the decision has been taken to transfer responsibility to the Central Bank.
The amendments we are now discussing create a new Part VI in the Central Bank Bill devoted entirely to amending the Investment Intermediaries Act to the extent necessary to make the Bank the sole supervisory authority for investment intermediaries and the competent authority for the purposes of the EU Investment Services and Capital Adequacy Directives. I emphasise that the fact the amendments needed to make the Bank the sole regulator are being taken in the Central Bank Bill does not prevent further work being done. A working group representing the Department of Finance, the Department of Enterprise and Employment, the Department of Justice and the Central Bank is examining the operation of the Intermediaries Act. In this context, I look forward to hearing the views of the Select Committee on Enterprise and Economic Strategy.
There is also a need to examine certain technical amendments to the Investment Intermediaries Act which have been put forward by the Central Bank, not to mention proposals received just this week from the working party representing the various interests in the investment services industry on the prudential supervision of intermediaries who are involved in both insurance and investment business. These proposals are complex and will take some time to consider.
The Investment Intermediaries Act has now been in operation for some 18 months. As Deputies will appreciate, the regulation of investment intermediaries is a complex area, not least because of the wide differences in the types of business being regulated, ranging from the banks to one person operations. Deputies should remember that little was known about the size or precise nature of the investment business sector when the legislation was being introduced. It is appropriate that the operation of the Act should be kept under review to ensure the Central Bank is properly equipped to fulfil its obligations as a supervisory authority under the Act.
To the extent that amendments to the Act are necessary, it is proposed to make those amendments in other legislation relating to the financial sector which is being prepared in the Department of Finance; in all likelihood they will be in the proposed Investor Compensation Bill. It would not be appropriate to make piecemeal amendments to the regulatory provisions of the Investment Intermediaries Act, not least because it will be important to ensure that the amendments made are coherent and appropriate consideration is given to the links which in practice exist in the market place between different types of financial intermediaries. Accordingly, I do not propose to do more at this time than make the minimum amendments to the Investment Intermediaries Act needed to make the Central Bank the sole supervisory authority for investment intermediaries.
Amendment No. 1 is a technical amendment to section 1. Section 1 provides that this Bill shall be construed together with the Central Banks Acts, 1942 to 1989, with the exception of certain sections of the Bill which relate to other legislation which are specified in section 1. A number of the amendments which I am proposing today relate to legislation other than Central Bank Acts and, if adopted, will require to be specified as exceptions in section 1. Amendment No. 1 amends section 1 so that it contains the appropriate references which will be needed if sections 10 to 22, inclusive, are accepted.
Amendment No. 10 introduces a new Part VI into the Central Bank Bill. This new Part contains the amendments to the Investment Intermediaries Act which will provide for the transfer of regulatory responsibility under the Investment Intermediaries Act from the Minister for Enterprise and Employment to the Central Bank, and so make the Central Bank the sole supervisory authority for investment intermediaries.
Amendment No. 10 also inserts a new section, section 36, into the Central Bank Bill. This new section 36 substitutes a new section for section 4 of the Investment Intermediaries Act. The existing section 4 of that Act established the Minister for Enterprise and Employment and the Central Bank as the supervisory authorities for investment business firms and defined the categories of investment business firms for which they are responsible. Subsections (a) and (b) of the amended section will provide that the Central Bank alone will be the supervisory authority for all investment business firms under the Act.
The new subsection 4(c) provides that the Investment Intermediaries Act is to be construed as referring to one supervisory authority only. This is because the Act was written with two supervisory authorities in mind, for example, the Act refers to "each supervisory authority" and the "relevant supervisory authority".
Amendment No. 11 inserts a new section 37 into the Central Bank Bill. This new section amends section 8 of the Investment Intermediaries Act to provide that the Minister for Enterprise and Employment will no longer be a competent authority for the purpose of the investment services directive and the capital adequacy directive which the Investment Intermediaries Act transposed into Irish law. The bank will, therefore, be the sole competent authority in the State for the purposes of the two directives, responsible for supervising compliance by all investment business firms falling under the investment services directive and the capital adequacy directive with the requirements of those directives.
Amendment No. 12 inserts a new section 38 into the Central Bank Bill. This new section amends section 10 of the Investment Intermediaries Act by the addition of a new subsection (17). The new subsection (17) provides that an application for authorisation under the Investment Intermediaries Act which was made to the Minister for Enterprise and Employment before the commencement of this subsection will constitute an application to the bank for authorisation. This is to help ensure that outstanding applications for authorisation made to the Minister for Enterprise and Employment continue to be valid so as to ensure that the transfer responsibility from the Minister for Enterprise and Employment to the bank is as seamless as possible.
Amendment No. 13 inserts a new section 39 into the Central Bank Bill. This new section is a technical amendment to section 20 (5) of the Investment Intermediaries Act. Section 20 of that Act deals with the general functions of supervisory authorities. Subsection (5) provides in particular that the supervisory authorities are to cooperate with one another and with competent authorities in other member states. The reference to co-operation between supervisory authorities is clearly redundant when there is only one supervisory authority and so the reference is being deleted.
Amendment No. 14 inserts a new section 40 into the Central Bank Bill. This new section is a technical amendment deleting references to the Minister for Enterprise and Employment in section 22 of the Investment Intermediaries Act. Section 22 of that Act enables the supervisory authority to apply to the High Court for an order winding up the investment business firm, or for an order of dissolution in the case of partnership, or for an adjudication of bankruptcy in the case of a sole trader. Subsections (5) and (6) of section 22 permit a representative appointed by the Minister for Enterprise and Employment or by the Governor of the bank to attend a meeting of creditors or to be a member of a committee of inspection into the investment business firm. As the Minister for Enterprise and Employment is no longer to be a supervisory authority, there is no need for reference to the Minister in the subsection and so the reference is being deleted.
Amendment No. 15 inserts a new section 41 into the Central Bank Bill. This new section is a technical amendment to section 25(b) of the Investment Intermediaries Act. Section 25 of that Act contains the definition of an investment product intermediary. This type of investment business firm is engaged in the provision of certain forms of investment business services, consisting mainly of passing on customers orders in relation to certain investment instruments, including unit trusts and other collective instruments. These instruments are defined by reference to a list in section 4(2). As section 4(2) is being deleted by the new section 36 of the Central Bank Bill, inserted by amendment No. 10, this amendment is necessary to insert direct references to the investment instruments in question in section 25.
Amendment No. 16 inserts a new section 42 into the Central Bank Bill. This is a technical amendment to section 26(1) of the Investment Intermediaries Act, following on from the amendment of section 10 of the Act by section 37 of this Bill. Section 26 of the Investment Intermediaries Act defines restricted activity investment product intermediaries as those investment business firms which may not handle client funds and whose activities are limited to acting as a deposit broker or agent and transmitting order and certain instruments, including unit trusts and other collective instruments. These instruments are defined by reference to a list in section 4(2) and as section 4(2) is being deleted by section 37 of the Central Bank Bill this amendment is necessary to insert direct references to the investment instruments in question.
Amendment No. 17 inserts a new section 43 into the Central Bank Bill. This new section substitutes a new section for section 27 of the Investment Intermediaries Act. For clarity, because the section is relatively short, the amendment reenacts the full section, although there are only two changes to the original wording. Section 27 of that Act sets out the requirements for investment product intermediaries. One requirement is that such intermediaries must have professional indemnity insurance in a form specified by the Minister for Enterprise and Employment. The Minister must consult the Central Bank when specifying the requirements for professional indemnity insurance. The first change is to remove the reference to the Minister for Enterprise and Employment, specifying the professional indemnity insurance. Instead, the Central Bank will specify the form and details of the professional indemnity insurance required of investment product intermediaries. This second change is to remove the requirement that the Minister consult the bank on the question of professional indemnity insurance.
Amendment No. 18 inserts a new section 44 into the Central Bank Bill. The new section 44 is a technical amendment to section 28 of the Investment Intermediaries Act to take account of the amendment of section 4 of the Act by the new section 36 of this Bill inserted by amendment No. 10 and to delete a reference to the Minister for Enterprise and Employment. Section 28 of that Act obliges a product producer to conduct certain checks on an investment product intermediary prior to appointing the intermediary to act on its behalf in relation to certain investment products. Those products include unit trusts and other collective instruments, which are defined by reference to a list in section 4(2)(a) to (c) of the Act. However, section 4 is being replaced by amendment No. 10 and will no longer contain the list of investment products. As a result, this amendment is needed to write the instruments into section 28 directly.
Amendment No. 19 inserts a new section 45 into the Central Bank Bill. The new section replaces a reference to the Minister for Enterprise and Employment in section 29 of the Investment Intermediaries Act by a reference to the supervisory authority. Section 29 of that Act provides that a restricted activity investment product intermediary must inform clients that it is not authorised to accept funds or securities or to provide discretionary management of client funds. The section provides that the Minister for Enterprise and Employment may prescribe other information which that sort of investment intermediary must provide. In line with the other amendments to the Act, I am replacing the reference to the Minister by a reference to the supervisory authority.
Amendment No. 20 inserts a new section 46 into the Central Bank Bill. This new section replaces a reference to the Minister for Enterprise and Employment in section 31 of the Investment Intermediaries Act by a reference to the supervisory authority. Section 31 of that Act obliges a product producer to keep a register of all its appointed investment product intermediaries at its principal office in the State. Product producers are obliged to furnish the information in these registers to the Minister for Enterprise and Employment. This amendment provides that in the future that information will have to be given to the bank. The bank will also take over the Minister's obligation to maintain a register of all investment product intermediaries and to make the register available to the public.
Amendment No. 21 inserts a new section, section 47, into the Bill. This section delete references to the Minister for Enterprise and Employment in section 64 of the Investment Intermediaries Act, which deals with the appointment of authorised officers. The Governor of the Central Bank and the Minister for Enterprise and Employment appoint such officers. The reference to the Minister will be removed by this amendment.
Amendment No. 22 inserts a new section, section 48, into the Bill. This section deletes references to the Minister for Enterprise and Employment wherever they occur in section 78 of the Investment Intermediaries Act, which prohibits the disclosure of documentation relating to a person obtained under a search warrant to anybody without the consent of the person concerned.
I allowed a certain latitude in this respect because of the extensive nature of the amendments under discussion and I will now extend the same latitude to the principal Opposition speakers.
I speak at this committee in place of my colleague, Deputy McCreevy. Are we voting on the amendments individually or is one vote to be taken on them overall?
We are required to vote as they arise. I am in the hands of the committee with regard to the voting procedure.
We will propose a division. May we take all these amendments in one division?
Procedurally no, but effectively yes. We will take one vote on the amendments.
This matter was debated yesterday in the Dáil when the proposals to submit the Bill to Committee Stage was debated and voted on. Following on that the Select Committee on Enterprise and Economic Strategy heard a submission. This was followed by a private meeting involving another group of interested parties making submissions on the issue of where we now place financial intermediaries.
The proposals by the Minister of State and her Department mean that we will go from one mess to another. The mess started with the passing of the Financial Intermediaries Act, which is now recognised by all as a fiasco. For example, a code of conduct for financial intermediaries was provided for but has never been introduced, despite the detailed provisions in the Act, especially with regard to striking off those found to be acting falsely.
The Act was introduced by the Department of Finance and was then sent to the Department of Enterprise and Employment. It fell between these two Departments, neither of which fulfilled its remit. The Department of Enterprise and Employment behaved in a dilatory fashion. The Minister of State at the Department, Deputy Rabbitte, said he was taking decisive action by involving the Central Bank. However, this is a foolish and wrong decision.
Last September the Select Committee on Enterprise and Economic Strategy set itself the task of taking oral and written submissions on how we could fulfil our remit of suggesting alterations to the investment intermediaries legislation to ensure, as far as possible, a better regime for the regulatory authority of financial intermediaries. We received a final oral submission yesterday from a disparate but interesting group, which had common thread running through it. Next week, the Chairman, Deputy Bell, will present us with an interim report which we then expect to present to the Minister of State, Deputy Rabbitte, who has ridden roughshod over the elected members of a select committee of the House.
The chairman places great store on the work of the committees and has made his name working on them. The Taoiseach also supports their work. Yet the work of one such committee has been derided, with one of its interim reports appearing after the event. It makes a nonsense of what has been said about transparency.
The Central Bank does not want this legislation. On 8 January, five days after the Minister of State, Deputy Rabbitte, took his so-called strong and decisive action to park this matter with the bank, the Governor of the bank told the Select Committee on Enterprise and Economic Strategy that he had not known this was to happen. He said that what was proposed by the Government held unique difficulties which should not be understated.
We are now in the ludicrous position where the Department of Finance proposes a measure which the Governor of the Central Bank says will propose unique difficulties. I also understood from his further remarks that it was the considered view that the bank, which deals with macro economic matters, is now to be involved in the minutiae of financial regulation in a consumer and retail sense.
The select committee will finish its work next week. Regardless of this, and regardless of the views of the Governor of the Central Bank and other parties who have made submissions, the ludicrous situation has now arisen where amendments Nos. 1 to 22 are being rushed through to change the role of the bank whereby it will become the monitor of ring-fenced financial intermediaries.
I appeal to the Chairman's sense of fair play given his experience and long service in the House, to respect our rights and to stay these amendments for two weeks until the committee's interim report is published. We hope this will suggest the correct way forward regarding control, monitoring and the regulatory regime for financial intermediaries. We oppose the amendments.
The Chair cannot stay the amendments. That is a matter for the committee. The Chairman of the Select Committee on Enterprise and Economic Strategy, Deputy Bell, spoke to me about the matter yesterday.
I am aware of that.
Following consultation with the Minister of State, the Minister for Finance and Deputy Bell, it was decided the committee should proceed with Committee Stage today on the basis that the report of the Select Committee on Enterprise and Economic Strategy, which will be available next week, will be considered by the Minister in the context of Report Stage.
I support the points made by Deputy O'Rourke. I studied the report and am aghast at the Government's approach to the committee system. I consider this an abuse of the system. The Act obviously is not working and the system of regulation has broken down. The Select Committee on Enterprise and Economic Strategy has been asked to thoroughly investigate this matter and to come up with a solution by bringing all interested parties before it. That process is ongoing. The Government has seized an opportunity at this committee to solve a problem in a slipshod manner. However, the difficulty cannot be resolved in the manner suggested by the Minister.
She told the committee earlier the European monetary institute has not yet given its opinion and it will not be available for at least another ten days to two weeks. It is extraordinary that the Government would proceed in such circumstances. The Governor of the Central Bank is at best unhappy with the Government's approach and we are making a bad situation worse. Nobody will be happy with the result. The matters covered by the amendments are not the business of the Central Bank and the problem will be compounded rather than improved. I take grave exception to the Government's approach in misusing and abusing two important committees of the House with regard to this matter. It is a grave disservice to the committee system which is working well and practically brings it into disrepute. I also oppose the amendments.
I support the points made by my two colleagues. The Chairman said he spoke to the Chairman of the Select Committee on Enterprise and Economic Strategy, Deputy Bell, who said the report would be available in the coming weeks and the Minister would then consider it.
Deputy Bell approached me. We discussed this matter and he conveyed the view that the report of the Select Committee on Enterprise and Economic Strategy would be ready soon. In his opinion there was a case for suspending Committee Stage until the report is available. I told him I saw some merit in that point and I would discuss it with the Minister of State. She in turn discussed it with the Minister for Finance and I understand he discussed it with Deputy Bell.
Since yesterday afternoon?
Last night I had a communication from the Minister for Finance through the Minister of State that, following their conversation, they proposed to proceed with Committee Stage today and the report will be considered. If, arising from the report, further amendments are necessary, they will be introduced on Report Stage.
Is there a precedent for this type of action? I doubt there is a precedent. We could be in a position where it may be necessary to undo amendments agreed today on the basis of the report from the Select Committee on Enterprise and Economic Strategy. It may be necessary to introduce new amendments to transfer responsibility to the Department of Enterprise and Employment. I have no objection to Committee Stage being taken today but surely the way forward is to withdraw these amendments and await the contents of the report. I ask the Minister to consider this suggestion.
I confirm the Chairman's report of the discussions held yesterday evening on the proposal which came from him through Deputy Bell about postponing Committee Stage until next Thursday.
There will be a meeting on Wednesday.
The point was made that the interim report should be sanctioned by the committee next Wednesday. However, between next Wednesday evening and Thursday morning, even if Committee Stage was postponed for a week, there would not be sufficient time to do justice to any report, particularly the extensive document I suspect the committee's report will be. One week would not resolve the logistical problem the Deputies mentioned.
No slight to the work of the Select Committee on Enterprise and Economic Strategy was intended. However, we must do something urgently about the matter; otherwise, the Department of Enterprise and Employment will have to set up interim regulatory arrangements. It does not just involve postponing the debate for another week. If the matter is not dealt with today, it would involve a delay of another three to four weeks. This is why the amendments have been moved but they do not preclude accommodating any recommendations arising from the interim report of the Select Committee on Enterprise and Economic Strategy.
The Central Bank is an excellent choice as a regulator. I acknowledge that concerns have been expressed about possible difficulties for the Central Bank in regulating intermediaries involved both in insurance based and non insurance investment business. The Governor of the Central Bank said there are some unique difficulties to be resolved and these should not be understated. However, as Deputies are aware, the Central Bank has extensive powers of regulation under the Investment Intermediaries Act. The governor also told the Select Committee on Enterprise and Economic Strategy the bank's view was that the Act provides a good legislative basis for the supervision of investment intermediaries.
If I was in Opposition I could quote selectively from any statements made by the governor to a committee to bolster a particular aspect of this debate. However, if one reads the governor's contribution to the committee, one will note that he was being prudent and cautious. He said the Act provides a good legislative basis for the supervision of investment intermediaries. However, I accept that he made the statement quoted by Deputy O'Rourke.
For example, under section 10, an investment business firm applying for authorisation must satisfy the bank that the organisation of its business structure is such that it and any of its related or associated undertakings, where appropriate and practicable, are capable of being supervised adequately. Section 10 also allows the bank on an ongoing basis to impose requirements on an investment firm to organise its business in such a way that the firm is capable of being supervised to the satisfaction of the bank.
The issue of ring fencing investment business also arose yesterday and today when we had time to debate it. Little is known about several hundred retail investment intermediaries who must now be regulated directly, many of which will also be involved in insurance. Nobody yet knows how many of them exist, how they tend to be set up, how they organise their business and what proportion of their business insurance represents. As this is a key issue, we are not in a position to be absolutely sure that the extensive powers the bank already has will be adequate in practice to properly regulate the retail end of the intermediary sector. There is not enough information available and we are sailing into uncharted waters.
However, we should be much better informed about the retail sector once the bank sets about regulation and that information will feed into the review of the Act I mentioned. Then we will see what needs to be done. Prudential concerns have also been raised about the situation where the bank will regulate retailing intermediaries who are, in some cases, heavily involved in the insurance business. The question of regulators being able to talk to each other arises here; the industry has put forward the idea of a lead regulator in the context of proposals that appear to extend beyond pure investment intermediaries. Those proposals will be studied accordingly. There were problems in this area with the case being investigated by the Select Committee on Enterprise and Economic Strategy. I look forward to any suggestion the committee may have in that regard.
The interim report from the economic strategy groups is due after its meeting on 12 February and I will look at it. Without having seen it, I will not give any guarantees that I will make any amendments on Report Stage to accommodate the report. I will look at the report carefully and if I can accommodate any of the recommendations I will do so but it would be foolish of me to guarantee I will do so without having seen the recommendations.
Would it be better to withdraw the amendments now and re-enter them on Report Stage?
No, because we would have to put an interim arrangement in place that would be wasteful, costly, and ultimately unnecessary. The code of conduct, if committee members wish to hear it——
The Minister of State is making a charade of the committee.
Debate is appropriate, but ill temper serves nothing.
I am glad of the chairman's impartiality.
The code of conduct is required by section 37 of the Intermediaries Act and the Bank has a code of conduct in place but the other regulatory authority we are removing this morning had not put one in place so the point stands: the Department had not sorted out the code of conduct. I understand the Bank and the Department were joint regulators up to this point, before we give them sole regulatory authority in this area. The Bank had done what was necessary in relation to the code of conduct.
Amendment put.
The Select Committee divided: Tá, 12; Níl, 8.
|
Tá |
|
|
Byrne, Eric. |
Gallagher, Pat (Laoighis-Offaly). |
|
Connaughton, Paul. |
Kenny, Seán. |
|
Connor, John. |
McCormack, Pádraic. |
|
Creed, Michael. |
Mitchell, Jim. |
|
Doyle, Avril. |
Nealon, Ted. |
|
Ferris, Michael. |
Walsh, Eamon. |
|
Níl |
|
|
Ahern, Michael. |
Killeen, Tony. |
|
Cullen, Martin. |
McCreevy, Charlie. |
|
Foley, Denis. |
O'Hanlon, Rory. |
|
Keaveney, Cecilia. |
Smith, Brendan. |
Amendment declared carried.
Section 1, as amended, agreed to.
Sections 2 to 4, inclusive, agreed to.